| Author |
 Replies: 16 / Views: 3,875 |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1302 Posts |
http://www.coinweek.com/modern-coin...-know-about/You could spend your whole career searching for the elusive 1969 quarter in MS-67 and not find it. I pierce the veil of this clad era key date this week! My thanks go out to our own CladKing who helped out with some background information. I've written a full length feature on CladKing's career hunting for quality coins- I look for it to get published in the next couple of weeks. Edited by cc99999
09/03/2012 4:55 pm
|
|
|
|
Moderator
 United States
23522 Posts |
That was, as usual, an interesting and informative read. It's actually kind of tough to find much of anything post-1960 in high Gem MS, isn't it?
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2270 Posts |
Very good article!
This coin has been my favorite clad since at least 1970 and possibly as far back as 1969 and nothing has ever come along to displace it. In those days people were stillsetting aside a few rolls of clads each year but year after year this came to be fewer and fewer coins because nobody wanted them. In the case of the '69 the coins were so awful nobody thought anyone would ever want coins that were so bad. In those days I wasn't collecting clads either because the FED had the nasty habit of releasing old BU rolls so it seemed a waste to store them if I could get them in change several years later. When I did start collecting clads I thought it was a big secret that this date was so tough so I tried to keep the secret.
What makes the '69 so remarkable is not only the scarcity and the lack of BU rolls. It's not even that high grades are so very tough. What makes this date so incredible is that even nice pleasing (MS-63+) are so few and far between. This is the grade coins have always been most widely collected. Older coins like Barbers usually began life as an MS-64 or better so just finding a true Unc meant you usually had a nice attractive coin but '69 quarters started life as junk and almost all of them went straight into circulation. Now they would be worn out junk except for the fact most have been lost or destroyed since 1969 since they are designed to have only a 30 year life span (They actually last longer). Now days there are few mint sets left and most are corroded. Only about 8% of the original mint set mintage was nice attractive MS-63 or better and now two thirds of those are gone and more than half the survivors have PVC problems.
Ironically this tiny supply is still ample for the paltry demand but if demand ever picks up these will be gone in a few days as collectors seek them out. There was a time that finding 100's of these mint sets was easy and it just took a little of your time to poke through them. Now the sets are gone and finding even a dozen or two is difficult. These sets won't have many nice Philly quarters.
The supply will remain ample only so long as there is no demand.
All over the world the demand for locals moderns has been coming around and collectors are finding the same thing; no supply. Prices in other countries for moderns have been explosive and in the long run it will probably happen here as well.
Time don't fly, it bounds and leaps.
|
|
Valued Member
291 Posts |
Interesting article. In general, all the early clad coin are tough to find in MS65 or better.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
1302 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2270 Posts |
Nice attractive Gems for most clads are at least a little elusive. The most common of the early issues is the '72-D but solid Gems account for only about 7% of mintage in mint sets. They do appear in rolls but, like all eagle reverse clad rolls, these aren't common. Most Gems from rolls will not be as well made as mint set Gems. If collectors had been searching for quality in those days they would have been able to save large numbers of nice coins from rolls but they weren't really looking. If they had a nice looking roll they were far more likely to save it thanb a bad roll so years with good quality mostly just means more coins are saved more than it means more Gems will necessarily exist.
Sure, with a mintage over 2,000,000 and most of these sets still nice (except the 1.2 million destroyed) Gems will be "common" forever. But in this case "common" doesn't mean thick as fleas on a herd of goats but 56,000 coins plus whatever has been set aside already. Every year that goes by that people don't care another 3% of those 56,000 coins go into circulation.
Nobody is excited about such a common modern as Gem Denver clads today because the few collectors are looking for higher grades and tougher coins. Some of these (like the '72-D) are even more common in just a little lower grade like MS-64 so little higher grades will never get a high price. Almost all the '72-D quarters in mint sets are nice attractive MS-63 or better except for a few corroded coins and some badly marked coins.
Collectors always gravitate to rarity because we all end up seeking the same coins that we can't find. This won't be the Denvers for the main part since they are far more common but just as a cent collector is far more likely to have a nice Unc '14 cent than a '14-D, modern collectors in the future will be more likely to have a Gem '72-D than a Gem '72.
Time don't fly, it bounds and leaps.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2270 Posts |
Quote:
That was, as usual, an interesting and informative read. It's actually kind of tough to find much of anything post-1960 in high Gem MS, isn't it?
It's different with the '60 to '64 coins. Huge numbers of these were set aside. In those days many of the hubs (especially nickels) were badly worn and the percentage of extremely well made coins was very very low so even with large numbers to check Gems are still tough. But if all you want is a nice clean coin allof the '60 to '64 coinage is readily available and the silver tends to come fairly nice. This doesn't mean MS-67's aren't tough but Gems tend to be easy. After 1965 coinage quality deteriotated very badly overall and the number of coins saved plummeted. Mostly you have no choice but to seek mint sets since so few coins were saved after 1967. Fortunately mint set quality tends to run much better than circulation quality or all the Gems would be very scarce today. Everything changed in 1965. The government didn't want people collecting coins and they did everything they could to stop them. It worked, and it's still working. Time don't fly, it bounds and leaps.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1770 Posts |
great article about the forgotten early clads
|
|
Valued Member
United States
157 Posts |
Interesting article. In trying to complete my clad era quarters in BU, the 69 has dogged me the most, and it's the only empty hole for quarters in the clad era in my collection. Every 69 I see in Mint State has been ugly, including those in the many mint sets I've looked over.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2764 Posts |
Thank you for sharing your great knowledge.
|
|
Moderator
United States
187702 Posts |
As always, a great read.  |
|
New Member
United States
20 Posts |
But isn't the 1983-P quarter a lot more difficult - to say nothing of a lot more expensive?
I'll have to look at my 1969 when I get home (I'm actually at work right now!). It's probably no better than MS-63.
|
|
New Member
United States
22 Posts |
I read this article a few weeks back when it was first posted. Just getting back in to coin collecting by collecting Walker halves, I often hear about poor strikes but to be honest, I'm not sure I can really pick out a poor strike. I know the parts of the walkers to look for when it comes to grading, but don't know if I would be able to tell if it was worn or a poor strike. I usually (and correctly imho) pick the coins I like the most or that looks like upgrade. I'd like to start with clad quarters just as a fun, less expensive long term set to collect but don't even know where to start when determining poor strike of these. Anyone have any guidance on stuff like this? |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2270 Posts |
Quote:
But isn't the 1983-P quarter a lot more difficult - to say nothing of a lot more expensive?
I'll have to look at my 1969 when I get home (I'm actually at work right now!). It's probably no better than MS-63.
Tomato/ tomatoe. The '82-P is probably more elusive in well struck Gem (I doubt the '83-P is), but the problem with the '69 is that it is not only scarce in Gem but difficult in any attractive condition at all. A great deal depends on attrition as the mintage and initial savings rate of nice '69 quarters was far higher than nice '82 or '83 quarters since the '69 did appear in mint sets. But each year that goes by the attrition on the '69 is far far greater than the attrition on the '83. Dealers still tell customers to just spend rolls of '83's once in a while and there are other ways these get into circulation but since they have a high price (since about 1989) they are mostly protected from being degraded or lost. The '69 has never really had a high price, though it has beenm creeping higher in recent years, and this allows for the coins to get overlooked and not be valued by their owners. People who buy a 1969 quarter for 50c simply aren't as likely to still have it in the future whether it's a dog or a Gem as someone who bought an '83-P for $30. The initial mintage of '69 quarters in Gem was actually quite high. In the mint sets there were about 16,000 coins that were full Gems. But the attrition on these has been staggering and is still extremely high (~2%). The number of '83-P Gems that were inially saved is far lower at about 1,000 coins but the attrition hasn't been working as long on these and is far lower (~1%). A lot (percentagewise) of '83-P coins just miss being Gem. Very few '69 quarters just miss being Gem. Collectors like nice choice examples so spillover of unsatisfied demand for nice choice '69's will have to go into the Gems. Think of it another way. The typical coin shop only has a couple of '69 mint sets now days and only a few walk in the door for sale any longer. This is the "entire" supply for this date and the odds are not one of these sets will even have a nice Philly quarter. Obviously if people start actually putting together sets of clads then a lot of people will have to send off for an '83-P putting a lot of pressure on price. I'm betting that more choice '83's can come out of the woodwork than '69's. The depth of the supply of clads is much shallower than people believe. Most of those 1969 mint sets that aren't seen any longer simply don't exist at all and all the coins in them have been placed into circulation and the silver hoarded or melted. These coins simply aren't valued and this is what happens to "common" coins that aren't valued. Time don't fly, it bounds and leaps.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2270 Posts |
Quote:
I'd like to start with clad quarters just as a fun, less expensive long term set to collect but don't even know where to start when determining poor strike of these. Anyone have any guidance on stuff like this?
The tough thing with learning strikes on many moderns is finding a coin with a good strike for comparison since they can be almost universally poor strikes. Just as you look at the high points to determine wear for grading this is a good place to start with determining strike. Tip the coin sideways between your eye and a good incandescent light source. The high points will appear to stand above the field. These high points are the last to strike up but the specific high points that tend not to strike up will be unique to the series and vary by date. Where worn (grayish) high points indicate wear shallow and rough high points indicate lack of complete strike. It's actually easier with eagle reverse clad quarters and especially the older ones because poor strikes almost always show up in the same place every time. The last detail that fills on a clad quarter is the tops of the lettering around the periphery. If the coin didn't have enough time or the dies enough pressure in the coining chamber these letters won't have a nice rounded and full top to them. The letters are all about the same depth in the die and have squarish sides and a rounded bottom. The letters should reflect this. It gets even easier actually since you can usually just compare the differences between a mint set coin and a lightly worn specimen or regular issue of the same date. The mint set coin is normally going to be better struck than anything else. This might not matter to people collecting the well made years but with moderns there are numerous dates that are extremely difficult to find very well made even in the mint set. Then when you do find a well made coin finally if it's not in the mint set it is likely to have a worn die. Even easier just take a good look at almost any 1972-D quarter in a mint set. This coin is almost always well made and at least 80% struck. But look at the bottom of the "2" in the date and see how flat it is. Try to find one that isn't flat! Time don't fly, it bounds and leaps.
|
|
Valued Member
United States
280 Posts |
What are the key date clad quarters? I've heard 1969 and 1983, what others are there?
|
| |
Replies: 16 / Views: 3,875 |
Posted 09/03/2012 6:01 pm
